24 March 2011
We begin with Glenn Beck’s radio and television programs today in which he begins to share some of his conclusions about recent world events.
This morning Jared Law, of the 9/12 project, sent an email informing the forum’s members of something he’d just heard on Glenn’s radio program:
Glenn Beck just finished with his breakdown of the ties that bind the radical left to radical Islam, from the White House to Soros to Libya…
To hear the whole thing explained was one of those moments when those of us who believe that the evidence showing that there is a conspiracy to overthrow the freedoms of all nations hasn’t, and cannot, be explained away, and that there really is a vast, leftist conspiracy against not only the people of America, but of the entire world. Many of you will remember that Hillary Rodham Clinton leveled the converse charge against our side back in the 1990’s, providing further proof that the left is constantly accusing the pro-freedom side of doing precisely what they, themselves, are doing. When the left accuses, start looking for evidence that they’re doing what they accuse us of doing; it’s going to be there, it always is…
Later The Right Scoop posted this video from the radio program adding,
“Beck’s TV show should be interesting tonight as he spent a fair amount of time talking about how we are aiding our enemies in the middle east and shooting ourselves in the foot by killing our oil production. Beck gets really passionate in this clip as he see America on the wrong side.
“It’s intense!”
This evening we watched Glenn’s television program. What we believe he demonstrated was the unfolding of a sprawling, complex web of money, corruption, anti-semitism, terrorism, and politics tightly woven into one global nightmare if you are a freedom-loving human being. If Glenn Beck is right, the United States is now complicit in the planned destruction of Israel. Ironically, the United Nations was involved in the creation of the country is now also involved in its possible annihilation.
Perhaps many of Beck’s listeners and viewers are hearing the name Samantha Power for the first time. Here at CAJ, we remembered her at once, initially from the campaign season of 2008:
Samantha Power Resigns Over Hillary “Monster” Remark
The Huffington Post
3/28/2008
In an unguarded moment during an interview with The Scotsmen, Obama aide Samantha Power shared some harsh words about Hillary Clinton:
“We f***** up in Ohio,” she admitted. “In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio’s the only place they can win.”She is a monster, too – that is off the record – she is stooping to anything,” Ms Power said, hastily trying to withdraw her remark.
Ms Power said of the Clinton campaign: “Here, it looks like desperation. I hope it looks like desperation there, too.
“You just look at her and think, ‘Ergh’. But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive.”
Read more coverage and reaction to Samantha Power’s resignation
UPDATE: Samantha Power speaks out to Irish news outlet RTE:
Of course I regret them, I can’t even believe they came out of my mouth. The campaign was getting very tense, and I — in every public appearance I’ve ever made talking about Senator Clinton, I have sung her praises as the leader she’s been, the intellect. She’s also incredibly warm, funny. I’ve spent time with her. I think that I just had a very weak moment in seeing some of the tactics, it seems, that were getting employed. I was just afraid really that the campaign would not stay at the level it had been on and I let out in a wave of frustration.
Sam Stein has written about the story of Power’s rise –and subsequent fall — in the political arena:
That Obama could bring her on board — he was, Power said, the first government official to have ever called her — was emblematic of the different style of politics that the Illinois senator was promising to represent. Far from a down-the-line liberal on international affairs, Power was known for her innovative (if not self-reflectively painful) analysis. On the Rwanda genocide, she concluded that U.S. officials had worked to ignore the problem, not failed to address it. On the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, she once advocated (though later recanted) spending billions of dollars and sending a military force to help create a Palestinian state next to Israel.
The whole piece is worth a read.
And much, much, much more to read about this incident at The Huffington Post.
On 29 January 2009, HuffPo announced, Samantha Power, Who Called Clinton A “Monster,” To Be Obama Aide.
What we seem to be learning from Van Jones and Samantha Powers is that people don’t leave the Barack Obama camp: they are just “re-assigned” and eventually turn up again. And here is the video of tonight’s program:
H/T The Right Scoop
This leads us to Beck’s theory that Power is working in this web to destroy Israel…and possibly the United States if Soros, Sunstein, and others have their way.
When Hillary Clinton accepted the position of Secretary of State, we reckoned she’d sold her soul to one of a number of devils. Well, you can decide for yourselves. Meanwhile, in case you haven’t seen them, here is a sampling of headlines from around the web:
The New York Post:
This past week, Hillary Clinton and a political analyst who famously called her a “monster” teamed up to convince President Obama to act in Libya.
When Samantha Power said Mrs. Clinton was a monster, Power was working on Barack Obama’s presidential campaign and resigned almost immediately. Now Power is on the National Security Council, and chances are good she doesn’t think Hillary is a monster any longer.
The Tuesday-evening meeting at the White House at which the president decided to move on Libya was “extremely contentious,” according to a report in Josh Rogin’s excellent blog, The Cable…
…Three years after the “monster” remark, Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power find themselves on the same side in a profound debate over American interests and American values as they serve an opaque president whose foreign policy has now achieved a new level of incomprehensibility.
They were opposed by Power’s own boss, National Security Adviser Tom Donilon and by Defense Secretary Robert Gates…
The Daily Beast:
Libya Airstrikes: The Women Who Called for War
That a diplomatic team led by Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power advocated military action against Gaddafi may be a footnote in the Libyan conflict—but it is a significant mark of our nation’s evolution, argues John Avlon.
The Libyan airstrikes mark the first time in U.S. history that a female-dominated diplomatic team has urged military action.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joined with U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and the influential Office of Multilateral and Human Rights Director Samantha Power to argue for airstrikes against Libya. Their advice triggered an abrupt shift in U.S. policy, overturning more cautious administrations’ counselors.
The circumstances under which the U.S. decided to attack the Gaddafi regime reveal an internal evolution of strategy. Until last week it was assumed the North African uprising against dictatorships would overwhelm the Libyan dictator. But in the absence of an established no-fly zone, he successfully turned the tide against rebels in the eastern half of his nation by strafing his citizens…
…Passages from Samantha Power‘s 2003 Pulitzer Prize-winning book A Problem From Hell offer insight into principles that may have driven internal Obama administration debates. Power compellingly criticizes the dynamics in previous administrations that allowed genocides and mass slaughters to proceed:
“A hopeful but passive and ultimately deadly American waiting game commenced… The U.S. government not only abstains from sending troops, but it takes very few steps along a continuum of intervention to deter genocide… [U.S. officials] render the bloodshed two-sided and inevitable, not genocidal. They insist that any proposed U.S. response will be futile. Indeed, it may do more harm than good, bringing perverse consequences to the victims or jeopardizing other precious American moral or strategic interests. They brand as ’emotional’ those U.S. officials who urge intervention and make moral arguments in a system that speaks principally in the cold language of interests.”
Whether the Clinton-, Rice-, and Power-led argument for intervention was branded “emotional” or not, their moral arguments apparently triumphed over “the cold language of interests.”…
The National Interest Blog:
American’s Foreign Policy Valkyries: Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice
Contrary to popular opinion, the Iraq War was not simply the product of neoconservatives. It was also championed by liberal hawks. An alliance between the two factions propelled the debate forward. It was forged in Bosnia, welded together by Iraq, then seemed to fall apart as the liberal hawks went AWOL. Now the liberal hawks have returned with a vengeance.
The Washington Post reports that a troika of female advisers–Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power–are, by and large, responsible for persuading President Obama– against the advice of Robert Gates and other members of the military establishment–that bombing Libya is a good idea. Power has condemned American foreign policy for failing to intervene sufficiently to avert genocidal wars, particularly in Bosnia and Rwanda. Bill Clinton has himself said that his biggest regret was not intervening in Rwanda to stop the carnage.
Now these Valkyries of foreign affairs want to come riding in on a new humanitarian mission to rescue the Libyan people from their oppressor. But will it end happily? Or will it be a new chapter in the twilight of the Gods–another blow to mighty America’s reputation?…
The New York Times:
Shift by Clinton Helped Push Obama to Take a Harder Line
…The president had a caveat, though. The American involvement in military action in Libya should be limited — no ground troops — and finite. “Days, not weeks,” a senior White House official recalled him saying.
The shift in the administration’s position — from strong words against Libya to action — was forced largely by the events beyond its control: the crumbling of the uprising raised the prospect that Colonel Qaddafi would remain in power to kill “many thousands,” as Mr. Obama said at the White House on Friday.
The change became possible, though, only after Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at theNational Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity. Ms. Power is a former journalist and human rights advocate; Ms. Rice was an Africa adviser to President Clinton when the United States failed to intervene to stop the Rwanda genocide, which Mr. Clinton has called his biggest regret.
Now, the three women were pushing for American intervention to stop a looming humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, one of the early advocates for military action in Libya, described the debate within the administration as “healthy.” He said that “the memory of Rwanda, alongside Iraq in ’91, made it clear” that the United States needed to act but needed international support.
In joining Ms. Rice and Ms. Power, Mrs. Clinton made an unusual break with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, who, along with the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and the counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, had urged caution. Libya was not vital to American national security interests, the men argued, and Mr. Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda…
Every time we watch a video of Tamar Fogel, we ask ourselves, what about the horrors this child has witnessed, what about her rights?
We pray a lot…for America…for Israel…for our world.
